Urban speed limits - Bristol

I wanted to draw the attention of Mumsnetters in Bristol to a survey the council is carrying out about urban speed limits.

Basically, from summer 2013 they intend much of Bristol to become 20mph, which is great news for anyone with errant toddlers who like to run out into the road, anyone with kids who like to cycle and anyone who wants to walk their children to school without the soundtracks of noisy speeding cars.

Anyway, their current survey has, I'm told become dominated by male non-parent drivers and they're hoping that some of us busy mums might have 5 minutes to add a bit of balance. It's online at www.bristol.gov.uk/20mph and it runs til end of September.

Wouldn't it be great if, for once, the safety of our streets was an issue mums had a say in?

Not sure why people are being a bit nasty about this, OP was just bringing it to peoples attention, whether they agree or not.

Being local, a worker, and a parent, its right that as diverse a cross section of locals respond. And being busy, I hadn't known about the survey until I saw it here. And if you actually read the plans, I don't see why anyone would actually object?

Not sure why people are being a bit nasty about this, OP was just bringing it to peoples attention, whether they agree or not.

Actually, OP was trying to get the vote rigged. I would be interested to know why. Does OP work for the local council and wants to get the vote in her favour?

I think we should be told.

^Being local, a worker, and a parent, its right that as diverse a cross section of locals respond. And being busy, I hadn't known about the survey until I saw it here. And if you actually read the plans, I don't see why anyone would actually object?^

I've read the plans and I object.

Also, why would non-locals bother responding?

Because if it's rolled out in Bristol then everyone will have to suffer the same idiocy.

Well, your interpretation differs to mine. ISTM that anyone asking for a 'balancing' of opinion in a public consultation is doing the same as someone 'balancing' the results of an election. But perhaps I'm wrong, and OP really is just someone trying to see all sides of the argument.

I am interested as to why 20mph would be a problem for anyone, why do you think it would be a bad idea? Wouldn't benefits out weigh the need to speed?

I do a fair amount of driving in my job. I basically get paid while I'm working at a site. I don't get paid while I'm travelling to that site. So the longer I spend travelling to a site, the lower my earnings. I'm not alone, of course. Sales reps, couriers, any kind of fitter (construction, plumbing etc), and so on, are all in the same position.

So the 20mph policy will have an impact on my earnings, and the earnings of (if it's rolled out countrywide) millions of people. That means that I - and millions of others - will have to put our prices up. Again.

But this economic effect is hard to calculate, and the safetyists have no interest in calculating it. They prefer to emote about 'my ickle babby might run in to the road and die' than look at the real effects of such a policy.

The roads are the lifeblood of a city. They're already an unpleasant enough experience and it's rare to be able to travel at the speed limit. Lowering the speed limit is going to make it worse. Pollution will be worse, congestion worse and driving even more unpleasant.

We have 20mph near me and NO ONE adheres to them. My theory is that if we were really stringent with the 30mph this would be a better solution. I have a bolting toddler, BTW and I don't want 20mph all over. Why not do what they do in the States and have school zones with variable speed limits? 20mph at school opening and closing and 30mph the rest of the time?

I also have a lot of travel time, we often have several "jobs' on the go at the same time, so tend to have to go between sites a lot, I still would welcome safer roads,

You've got them. Road deaths have fallen pretty much every year for the last 30 years. But there's no evidence that cutting the speed limit doesn't make the roads safer. Most of the safety gains have been made by the car manufacturers - airbags, softer bumpers, side impact bars, anti-submarining seats, safety cages, and so on.

do you think it would make the roads less safe?

I don't think it would make them safer. The problem with the existing speed limits is a failure to enforce, which is the responsibility - or used to be - of the police. AIUI the police are too busy filling in paperwork to do any of that boring old policing.

It would be interesting to know whether 20mph would make journey times slower - in Bristol the roads tend to always be congested, so changing the speed limits would make little difference on main roads.

I wonder if a compromise could be to lower the speed limit to 20mph on all but the major roads (where tbh a toddler should not be roaming free anyway), and then turning off the traffic lights....this has worked brilliantly in Portishead!

You cannot enforce a 20MPH limit because speedometers aren't built to accurately show you when you are doing 20MPH. I seem to remember an episode of fifth gear from around ten years ago where they put this theory to the test using some common cars of the time. When they drove at a speedo indicated 20MPH, the they found that the speedo was under reading and that the car was travelling above 20MPH.

By the time the car was travelling at an indicated 30, the opposite was true - i.e. the speedo over read the speed.

Your toddler should be on reins, buggy or holding your hand, that is no reason to lower speed limits. There is 20mph speed limits in parts eg kingswood for example and it's still a bloody nightmare trying to get through.